Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course Barclays has excellent transit accessibility from many inner city areas and Manhattan, and some areas on the fringe of the city...even accessibility from parts of Long Island due to the station downstairs. Thankfully, there are plenty of private garages in the area and many of them can be reserved in advance via their website. I went to a concert there back in February, and for an 8pm concert on a Wednesday, from my house it would have taken me a half hour train ride, half hour ferry and 20 minute subway ride...or an hour and 15 minute local bus ride and then a half hour subway ride to get there via transit. Instead I got reserved parking four blocks away for $12 and it took me about 30 minutes to drive there in rush hour traffic lol.
But since you managed to find parking within a short distance, so the lack of much on-site parking doesn't seem to be a problem. It turns out the on-site parking hasn't filled up, and only 25% of visitors drove:
IMO, there's a good reasons not to encourage driving for a stadium: too much traffic in one spot, space constraints in center city areas (Barclays is technically not really downtown, but still "inner city" — it's one of those hard to classify location). Since it's also almost adjacent to residential neighborhoods, I'd be sympathetic to the locals who fear increased traffic through their neighborhood [or from the other side, a local friend mentioned she was afraid of more difficult street parking due to the stadium]. If (hypothetically) everyone drove to the stadium, the congestion would be miserable [I've had unpleasant experiences from concert venues where everyone drove]. For those who have a direct train connection, taking transit isn't burdensome. And the rest (such as yourself) can still drive, with less congestion.
Also regardless of my preferences, if I was going with a group of 4 to Barclays and lived on Long Island, I'd drive. Paying $12 for parking (assuming that's the usual price) is a lot cheaper than 4 round trip LIRR tickets. If I was in walking distance to a subway station with direct or close to direct access, I'd probably choose the subway partly from personal preference and to avoid unexpected surprises.
All Indianapolis stadiums are downtown and I think it's a great thing. Colts games at Lucas Oil bring 70-80,000 people into downtown, many of which before and/or after the game visit one of the restaurants or bars right in the heart of downtown. Since they made it a dome and connected it via underground walkway to the Indiana Convention Center, they use it in the offseason for convention space. It also gets used for high school sporting events like the football state championships, marching band state championships, and I believe soccer championships. Drum Corp International uses it for it's world championships as does Bands of America. It replaced the RCA Dome which was right next door and that space was used to double the size of the convention center.
Bankers Life Fieldhouse is also downtown and hosts a good amount of Pacers and Fever games. Since they play opposite times of the year, that means the stadium stays pretty busy. When that isn't going on there are often concerts or shows like Disney On Ice, not to mention the Big Ten basketball championships and high school basketball championships. It replaced Market Square Arena which was very close by and also downtown. Sadly, the old Market Square Arena site still sits empty as city-owned land.
I think in an urban planning context though, Indianapolis has some work to do with its downtown stadiums. Developing anything that is not directly north of Lucas Oil Stadium has been a challenge. Aside from the state park, Victory Field pretty much marks the end of any integration with the neighboring areas. The Fieldhouse has been a road block to development, though it is creeping toward the fieldhouse from the south now. In the sense of "how well do these buildings interact and allow development around them" Indianapolis is lacking. The three stadiums were essentially placed on the periphery of downtown, and any other development was stunted.
I think in an urban planning context though, Indianapolis has some work to do with its downtown stadiums. Developing anything that is not directly north of Lucas Oil Stadium has been a challenge. Aside from the state park, Victory Field pretty much marks the end of any integration with the neighboring areas. The Fieldhouse has been a road block to development, though it is creeping toward the fieldhouse from the south now. In the sense of "how well do these buildings interact and allow development around them" Indianapolis is lacking. The three stadiums were essentially placed on the periphery of downtown, and any other development was stunted.
I agree, especially about Lucas Oil, but I think the biggest issue with development there is the railroad tracks. The elevated tracks kind of act as a visual, and thus mental, barrier to anything to the south if you're just a day visitor. If the tracks were underground, I feel things would development south a bit easier. Bankers Life has nothing east of it but the same elevated railroad tracks, and a giant parking garage. But it is true, directly across the street to the west is pretty empty, but starting to fill in. If the city actually had had a decent plan with Georgia St, it could be different, but they seriously screwed that up. CityWay helps expand downtown a bit that way, but it's again surrounded by those elevated tracks.
Unless Union Station gets used as a transit hub with an easy access point to the south (neither of which is going to happen), I think downtown will constantly struggle to get development south of the tracks. It's just too much of a visual block without a major, daily drawing power. If only the Legends District would have actually happened! But as far as whether I think downtown stadiums are good or bad, I do think they're good, even in Indianapolis. Fort Wayne really helped its downtown by relocated their minor league baseball stadium to downtown. Back when I lived there, downtown Fort Wayne was completely dead after 5pm. It still has a long way to go, though.
All Indianapolis stadiums are downtown and I think it's a great thing. Colts games at Lucas Oil bring 70-80,000 people into downtown, many of which before and/or after the game visit one of the restaurants or bars right in the heart of downtown. Since they made it a dome and connected it via underground walkway to the Indiana Convention Center, they use it in the offseason for convention space. It also gets used for high school sporting events like the football state championships, marching band state championships, and I believe soccer championships. Drum Corp International uses it for it's world championships as does Bands of America. It replaced the RCA Dome which was right next door and that space was used to double the size of the convention center.
Bankers Life Fieldhouse is also downtown and hosts a good amount of Pacers and Fever games. Since they play opposite times of the year, that means the stadium stays pretty busy. When that isn't going on there are often concerts or shows like Disney On Ice, not to mention the Big Ten basketball championships and high school basketball championships. It replaced Market Square Arena which was very close by and also downtown. Sadly, the old Market Square Arena site still sits empty as city-owned land.
I seriously doubt that Indianapolis would have gotten the Super Bowl if the stadium was built out in the suburbs. All of the glowing reviews of Super Bowl week discussed how well connected the stadium is to the downtown hotels/bars/restaurants.
Locating stadiums downtown with existing public transportation is also good policy from a drinking and driving perspective.
Overall I like DT stadiums but for any place there are details that impact the viability and need. In NYC its probably just too expensive to locate there for Example
Places like SF located the baseball stadium on the periphery but still works well. Even Philly has a decent location albeit I would have preferred a DT location it still benefits from really good PT connections and leverages use of the parking accross three different stadiums
In some other instances the stadiums help revitalize areas like SD or Houston with Reliant from what I understand
Overall I like DT stadiums but for any place there are details that impact the viability and need. In NYC its probably just too expensive to locate there for Example
Places like SF located the baseball stadium on the periphery but still works well. Even Philly has a decent location albeit I would have preferred a DT location it still benefits from really good PT connections and leverages use of the parking accross three different stadiums
In some other instances the stadiums help revitalize areas like SD or Houston with Reliant from what I understand
Overall I like DT stadiums but for any place there are details that impact the viability and need. In NYC its probably just too expensive to locate there for Example
Well it is already has one (Madison Square Garden). And Barclays is center-city ish but not downtown.
Out of curiosity, I checked where English cities have their stadium, since they tend to put things in more centralized locations there. Manchester United is near downtown (about 2.5 miles) but not in. Adjacent to a train station but also has a a large surface lot. Outside it's surrounded by typical urban row house neighborhoods as well as some semi-detached housing, I assumed the city is aggressive at making sure outsiders don't use the street parking. Otherwise, the location is a bit isolated from the rest of the city, with isolated high rise buildings and not all that pedestrian friendly.
This thread is hilarious. I am a supporter of Denver's two stadiums, Coors Field and Sports Authority Field at Mile High Stadium, though Mile High isn't really downtown. However, it cracks me up to see people singing the praises of these downtown stadiums, then in another breath vilify the old "urban renewal" projects such as Pittsburgh's Civic Arena. These projects "destroyed the very fabric of the city", yada, yada. That's why I always say, "in 50 years, they'll look back at some of this stuff and laugh". Come to think of it, the original Mile High stadium was an urban renewal project.
Baseball stadia are easier to integrate into a city than football stadia. Minneapolis did a great job with Target Field, which has light rail and commuter train connections and makes use of existing parking structures. The design takes advantage of the skyline as a beautiful backdrop.
The problems with football stadia are (1) infrequent use and (2) a tailgating culture that demands enormous surface parking lots.
I would argue that baseball stadia in indoor arenas (basketball, hockey, etc.) are best within the city whereas football stadia are better off in the suburbs.
two proposals were for the rialyard at 30th street and at Broad and Spring garden, both are technically not CC but directly adjacent
to nei - the current stadia (ums) in Philly are only like 2 miles from city hall and sit on the highest load capacity subway station in North America, still to me the are a little isolated but very functional
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
